In Depth

It’s no accident that on a college campus in Richmond recently, the Indiana Supreme Court heard a case that involves
allegations of hazing and potential liability for an incident at a Wabash College fraternity.

Justices and court staff deliberate about which cases would be good ones for traveling oral arguments, Chief Justice Brent
Dickson said. Ideal cases are those that have broad public interest, would be engaging for the public at the chosen venue,
and are not highly technical.

From left, justices Steven David and Robert Rucker, Chief Justice Brent Dickson, and justices Loretta Rush
and Mark Massa conduct a Q&A session with a Richmond audience after an oral argument at Indiana University East. (IL Photo/
Dave Stafford)

Indiana’s appellate judiciary for more than a decade has heard arguments around the state, many through the Appeals
on Wheels initiative of the Court of Appeals. Judges and justices say the arguments promote transparency and give the public
a chance to demystify a part of the judiciary many seldom see.

“At the 100th anniversary of our court, our goal was to visit every county in the state, and we almost have,”
Court of Appeals Judge Melissa May said. “One thing it does is allow everybody in the public to see what our appellate
court really does,” she said.

While the Supreme Court typically hits the road fewer than five times a year, the Court of Appeals averages about 27 Appeals
on Wheels arguments each year, according to court spokesman Martin DeAgostino. Since beginning the effort in 2000, he said
the court has heard 365 cases in 64 of Indiana’s 92 counties. Arguments most often are heard at high schools, colleges,
law schools or courthouses.

“First, we look at cases where oral argument has been requested, then we look for a case that may be of interest to
that area where we’re going or the type of crowd we expect,” May said. For an argument at a high school, for instance,
“We try to find a criminal search and seizure case, preferably a school case if we can find it.”

The appellate panels also routinely

allow the audience to ask questions after oral arguments, so long as the questions don’t pertain to the case at hand.

After the Supreme Court’s case in Richmond, the Q&A allowed the public to
lift the curtain on the court’s behind-the-scenes work. Dickson explained to an audience of about 75 that when sitting
in Indianapolis, the court typically retires after arguments and confers. Justices talk about the case and get a sense of
each justice’s views and where consensus may lie. After the Richmond arguments, justices planned to confer upon returning
to the Capitol, Dickson told those who watched the arguments.

An audience member asked the justices how the court decides who will write an opinion. Justice Mark Massa said it’s
a marker of the panel’s collegiality that a justice who earnestly wishes to write an opinion usually gets to do so.
But he allowed that there are times when competing interests prevail.

Massa explained that he and justices Robert Rucker and Loretta Rush each recently wanted to write an opinion. A coin flip
settled the matter. Rucker won. “Seniority,” he quipped to a laughing audience.

May said the COA attempts to arrange Appeals on Wheels arguments so that the panel judges hear cases in the regions from
which they were appointed. Cases usually are selected for traveling arguments about a month in advance.

“One reason we use a lot of criminal cases for traveling oral arguments is the state attorney general’s office
has been wonderful to deal with, as well as the public defender’s office,” she said. People at the venues, too,
“are really excited to have us there, and they bend over backwards to make sure everything runs smoothly.”

At Indiana University East, students in the criminal law program helped out with the proceeding. Sophomore Stewart Homdrom
had the honor of gaveling the court to order as a special bailiff. Before the arguments, he and fellow students passed out
programs and directed guests.

“It’s a big event for such a small campus,” senior Christa Ginter said.

The events also provide justices an opportunity to visit with local colleagues and talk about some of the things happening
in Indianapolis that people around the state might not be aware of. Dickson said justices also learn the concerns of attorneys,
judges and legal professionals in areas where the court sets roving arguments.

It’s a big event for the legal community, too. “When’s the last time you’ve had an opportunity to
put a bug in the ear of people from the Supreme Court?” Wayne Superior Judge Darrin Dolehanty said as attorneys and
others mingled with justices before the arguments in Richmond.

“Could we go to the Statehouse and watch these? Sure,” Dolehanty said. “But not without taking away from
work or school.”

As a matter of convenience, Dickson said the court often schedules traveling arguments to coincide with judges’ meetings
around the state. That was the case in Richmond.

Robert Chamness, director of probation for Wayne County, said the justices have come to I.U. East on prior occasions, and
those events have been popular with students and people in the legal community.

“It’s just an opportunity to get to see some of the things that happen at the Supreme Court level,” Chamness
said.

“I think it’s exciting to have the justices come to Richmond,” said Jane Wynegar, whose practice in Wayne
County primarily concentrates in trusts, wills and criminal law. “I think it gives the community a broader view of the
legal system.”•

Click here to read a recap of the arguments in Richmond on the Wabash College hazing lawsuit.

Conversations

0 Comments

Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or
hateful.

You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.

Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content
are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.

No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are
relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.

We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag
a post simply because you disagree with it.